King v. King
553 So. 2d 396, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7244, 1989 WL 153670
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 20, 1989·No. No. 88-2967·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The pro se appellant asserts as error the trial court’s failure to grant his motion to dismiss this dissolution action. The appel-lee takes the position that the motion was evidentiary and directed to the merits of the ease. However, it was not set for hearing before the trial court, nor did appellant appear at the final judgment hearing to assert his position. Since the error, if any, was not preserved in the trial court, [397]*397we must affirm. Palmer v. Thomas, 284 So.2d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
King v. King, 553 So. 2d 396, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7244, 1989 WL 153670 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).
553 So. 2d 396 (King v. King) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fitzpatrick v. State
553 So. 2d 396 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)